#1 is what they chose, and it makes sense. People will buy because it's the first new console out in a while. If you remember the DC launch, it went very well -- most preorders and a console sales record for the time. They just got crushed later on by the PS2.
If they went with #2, they would be going head-to-head against the PS3 and a lot of people would choose PS3 instead. Most don't have the cash to lay out for two consoles at once.
And #3 is what they were forced to go with for the Xbox. They did okay, but they want to dominate, not come in a distant second again.
So they're trying option #1 this time. I don't see any other rational choice.
Weak? That's funny. PS3 and the 360 will be very close in terms of real-world performance.
They'd sell a ton at $299, the typical console launch price.
Sony announced a launch in Spring 2006, but didn't say world-wide launch. It makes no sense for them to launch during that time-frame in north america. Look for a Fall 2006 launch there. Spring 2006 will be Japan only, I predict.
If I'm right, the 360 will have a year head start in NA and Europe.
You are waaaay off. Remember that they own the IP rights to the 360 CPU and GPU. They will merely be paying royalty fees to ATI and IBM this time around and can take the design and have it fabbed anywhere they like. ATI has stated that they expect $2 to $5 per Xbox 360 in paid fees from MS. The IBM deal is probably similar.
In pure silicon (and other hardware) costs, the latest word is that the 360 comes in at $375 or thereabouts, which is actually cheaper than the original Xbox. The reason? They don't have to buy parts from suppliers (Intel and nVidia last time) because they own the design for the parts themselves.
Of course, this doesn't count the R&D they've already spent, but that will be made up over the life of the console (or by 2007 if you believe Allard).
I predict a $299 price at launch. At most, $349 if they want to be in the black from day one.
True. I hate to pay the prices for name brand, but the generic carts just aren't as good -- at least for photos. With generics photos come out slightly discolored, banded, or grainy -- or all three. Name brands work perfectly.
I think you are going to be very disappointed. I would be willing to wager that no launch games for the PS3 will support 1080p, and I bet I'll be able to count the number of 1080p games in the first year on one hand.
The Xbox supported 1080i, but very few games supported it.
Thanks for making the reply so I didn't have to. The guy imagined a bunch of scenarios where games could be better -- but that doesn't mean the PS3 will actually be able to make games that much better than the 360, which was my point.
The bottom line is just because Sony says it's a 2 teraflop machine that's 2x the power of the 360 doesn't mean much. I will be very surprised if either console is much more powerful than the other with regards to actual games. We'll know the answer in a year or two.
I'm suggesting that there can be fabrication errors during the manufacturing process. If such an error causes a single SPE to not work properly, then there is no worry -- the eighth "extra" SPE will be there to compensate. Thus, the chip can still be used even if there is one or more small errors that are localized to one SPE. Thus yields are increased.
The guy I was responding to suggested that the eighth SPE was there to dynamically take over if an SPE failed during operation. I think this is bunk.
If I'm mistaken, please correct me; I'd welcome it.
Yeah, if it fails during fabbing. I shudder to think about the consequences if they were referring to part of the chip failing after it was in your machine.
STORAGE --HDD Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1 --I/O--USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0) --Memory Stickstandard/Duo, PRO x 1 --SD standard/mini x 1 --CompactFlash(Type I, II) x 1
It has a slot for a HDD, but no mention of actually including one in the box. If it was included, don't you think they would specifically say so?
How is it cancelled out by the PSP? What if I don't have a PSP? What if I don't want to buy a memory card to save games on? I'd much rather have some type of storage built in.
Slashdot Mirror
Yep, but depending on the price of the options, you can still lose money if the stock doesn't move enough.
This just in. Hollywood legend George Lucas will NOT, I repeat NOT, be able to afford his new gold-plated giant squid tank this year.
Fixed.
So what would you suggest? MS has three choices:
1. Launch first.
2. Launch simulaneously.
3. Launch second.
#1 is what they chose, and it makes sense. People will buy because it's the first new console out in a while. If you remember the DC launch, it went very well -- most preorders and a console sales record for the time. They just got crushed later on by the PS2.
If they went with #2, they would be going head-to-head against the PS3 and a lot of people would choose PS3 instead. Most don't have the cash to lay out for two consoles at once.
And #3 is what they were forced to go with for the Xbox. They did okay, but they want to dominate, not come in a distant second again.
So they're trying option #1 this time. I don't see any other rational choice.
Is this a joke? Sorry if I missed it.
No, catfish are not boneless. Anyone who has cooked and eaten one can testify to that.
An AC posted the article text here already, but I found the text plus some graphics copied to here: http://forum.xbox365.com/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=ge t_topic;f=66;t=000578;p=1#000009
Enjoy.
Don't know why, but it looks like the article has been pulled off the site. Speculate as you wish.
Weak? That's funny. PS3 and the 360 will be very close in terms of real-world performance.
They'd sell a ton at $299, the typical console launch price.
Sony announced a launch in Spring 2006, but didn't say world-wide launch. It makes no sense for them to launch during that time-frame in north america. Look for a Fall 2006 launch there. Spring 2006 will be Japan only, I predict.
If I'm right, the 360 will have a year head start in NA and Europe.
You are waaaay off. Remember that they own the IP rights to the 360 CPU and GPU. They will merely be paying royalty fees to ATI and IBM this time around and can take the design and have it fabbed anywhere they like. ATI has stated that they expect $2 to $5 per Xbox 360 in paid fees from MS. The IBM deal is probably similar.
In pure silicon (and other hardware) costs, the latest word is that the 360 comes in at $375 or thereabouts, which is actually cheaper than the original Xbox. The reason? They don't have to buy parts from suppliers (Intel and nVidia last time) because they own the design for the parts themselves.
Of course, this doesn't count the R&D they've already spent, but that will be made up over the life of the console (or by 2007 if you believe Allard).
I predict a $299 price at launch. At most, $349 if they want to be in the black from day one.
Uh, it's not just HDR that makes UE3 look so good.
True. I hate to pay the prices for name brand, but the generic carts just aren't as good -- at least for photos. With generics photos come out slightly discolored, banded, or grainy -- or all three. Name brands work perfectly.
It's true. MS has announced a VGA adapter for their console, and Sony has similar support (DVI, I think).
You've been testing chips that aren't out yet? I suspect you're talking about the dual core Pentium D chip which does run very, very hot.
These Dothan chips run much cooler and you can't get your hands on them yet.
You posted links containing your session id and you're calling iPod users morons?
Not sure where you got your info, but everything I've read has estimated a Xbox 360 launch library of 25-40 games.
And what, exactly, are the benefits of having texture sizes that are larger than your display resolution?
I will bow to them if it turns out to be true.
I've shopped around and have never even seen a 1080i 27" for that price. I'd love a link if you have one.
1080p is already here, it's just very expensive. How much will that 80" PDP or projector system cost? A pretty penny, no?
My point was that adoption of 1080p tech by home consumers will still be very, very low even in two or three years time, maybe more.
Of course, if your company can offer me a 1080p projector for less than two grand, please put me on the waiting list.
I think you are going to be very disappointed. I would be willing to wager that no launch games for the PS3 will support 1080p, and I bet I'll be able to count the number of 1080p games in the first year on one hand.
The Xbox supported 1080i, but very few games supported it.
Thanks for making the reply so I didn't have to. The guy imagined a bunch of scenarios where games could be better -- but that doesn't mean the PS3 will actually be able to make games that much better than the 360, which was my point.
The bottom line is just because Sony says it's a 2 teraflop machine that's 2x the power of the 360 doesn't mean much. I will be very surprised if either console is much more powerful than the other with regards to actual games. We'll know the answer in a year or two.
???
I'm suggesting that there can be fabrication errors during the manufacturing process. If such an error causes a single SPE to not work properly, then there is no worry -- the eighth "extra" SPE will be there to compensate. Thus, the chip can still be used even if there is one or more small errors that are localized to one SPE. Thus yields are increased.
The guy I was responding to suggested that the eighth SPE was there to dynamically take over if an SPE failed during operation. I think this is bunk.
If I'm mistaken, please correct me; I'd welcome it.
Yeah, if it fails during fabbing. I shudder to think about the consequences if they were referring to part of the chip failing after it was in your machine.
Check it:
6 81.html?q=1
STORAGE
--HDD Detachable 2.5" HDD slot x 1
--I/O--USB Front x 4, Rear x 2 (USB2.0)
--Memory Stickstandard/Duo, PRO x 1
--SD standard/mini x 1
--CompactFlash(Type I, II) x 1
It has a slot for a HDD, but no mention of actually including one in the box. If it was included, don't you think they would specifically say so?
Source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/05/16/news_6124
No, I don't think you're right. Check it:
CPU: Cell Processor PowerPC-base Core @3.2GHz
--1 VMX vector unit per core
--512KB L2 cache
--7 x SPE @3.2GHz
--*1 of 8 SPEs reserved for redundancy
The Cell is: One main core. Seven SPEs (originally eight, but they disabled one, most likely to increase yields).
The PS3 has only one Cell.
How is it cancelled out by the PSP? What if I don't have a PSP? What if I don't want to buy a memory card to save games on? I'd much rather have some type of storage built in.